DOT Tarmac Delay Rules Seem to be Working

When the DOT announced new tarmac delay guidelines last December, I opined that the rules would hurt the very people they intended to help. I am not ready to eat my hat just yet, but Scott McCartney’s column today calls my hypothesis into question.

I was positive that the guidelines would lead to airlines proactively canceling many flights, for fear of being fined by the DOT. After all, keeping passengers on the tarmac for more than three hours carries a fine of $27,500 per passenger. On a full A320, that’s over $4 million.

So far, that has not happened–too much. American Airlines says that 20% of its cancellations in May and June this year were due to the DOT tarmac rules, though its percentage of flights cancelled was only up 2% from last year.

On the other hand, Southwest, US Airways, Alaska and United have all seen precipitous drops in the number of cancelled flights over the last two months, versus the same period in 2009. Weather in May/June 2009 and 2010 was similar, if not a bit worse in 2010. Donald Dillman, UA’s vice president of operatiions stated:

"A few [of the cancellations] have been specifically because of the rule," he said. "It happens occasionally but not really that much."

And even when carriers are faced with a three-hour tarmac delay, flights are not be cancelled. AirTran, for example, had to return 84 flights back to the gate in May/June to comply with the new rule. Only five of the 84 flights, however, were cancelled.

Delta and Continental saw huge increases in the number of flights cancelled, but neither airline blames the DOT. Delta attributes its 133% increase in flight cancellations primarily to bad weather and traffic congestion while Continental blames volcanic activity over Iceland and in Guatemala.

In total, 836 more flights were cancelled this year in May and June than were cancelled in May and June in 2009. But, 792 of the cancellations can be blamed on the Spirit Airlines’ strike.

Despite this rather surprising news, it is still too early to tell whether these new regulations will hurt or help airline passengers. I’ll reserve final judgement till we get through the winter months.

"I would hardly call it benign," Mr. [Jonathan] Snook [vice president of operations planning and performance for AA] said of the impact of the tarmac rule. "There’s something wrong with the notion that passengers on a plane for two hours and 45 minutes have the flight canceled when they could have departed at three hours and 15 minutes."

About Author

Matthew

Matthew is an avid traveler who calls Los Angeles home. Each year he
travels more than 200,000 miles by air and has visited more than 120
countries over the last decade. Working both in the aviation industry
and as a travel consultant, Matthew has been featured in the New York
Times, Chicago Tribune, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, BBC, Fox News,
CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Al Jazeera, Toronto Star, and on NPR. Studying
international relations, American government, and later obtaining a
law degree, Matthew has a plethora of knowledge outside the travel
industry that leads to a unique writing perspective. He has served in
the United States Air Force, on Capitol Hill, and in the White House.
His Live and Let's Fly blog shares the latest news in the airline
industry, commentary on frequent flyer programs and promotions, and
detailed reports of his worldwide travel. His writings on
penandpassport.com offer more general musings on life from the eyes of a frequent traveler. He also founded awardexpert.com, a
highly-personalized consulting service that aids clients in the
effective use of their credit card points and frequent flyer miles.
Clients range from retirees seeking to carefully use their nest egg of
points to multinational corporations entrusting Matthew with the
direction and coordination of company travel.